X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 19:29:03 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma04.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.42] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.11) with ESMTP id 4660072 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 10:18:58 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.42; envelope-from=vtailjeff@aol.com Received: from mtaout-db05.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaout-db05.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.51.197]) by imr-ma04.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id oBVFIBLt020467 for ; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 10:18:11 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.135] (24-107-67-126.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.67.126]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mtaout-db05.r1000.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPSA id 77C75E0000AA; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 10:18:10 -0500 (EST) References: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8C148) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-1--178605873 X-Original-Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8C148) From: vtailjeff@aol.com Subject: Re: [LML] Re: post crash fire control X-Original-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 09:18:07 -0600 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:351967584:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d33c54d1df4322cb0 X-AOL-IP: 24.107.67.126 --Apple-Mail-1--178605873 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Another way to reduce post crash fire is to eliminate or mitigate spark. So a= ll electrical devices....OFF.=20 Sent from my iPad On Dec 31, 2010, at 12:10 AM, REHBINC wrote: > Colyn, > =20 > I am a forensic engineer and work quite a bit with fire and explosion as w= ell as mechanical/structural failure. > =20 > If I had a way to drain the fuel before crashing, I would get the tanks as= dry as possible. A couple ounces of gasoline trapped somewhere in the tank w= ould be plenty to make the space fuel rich. It isn't realistic to expect the= entire tank to be fuel rich before impact, but a portion of it certainly wi= ll be. It is all a matter of time and temperature. In tank ships, you need a= round 2 gallons or so to make the space fuel rich. Frequently there is more t= han this trapped behind the tank scale. > =20 > For the reasons stated earlier, I wouldn't be too concerned about an explo= sion risk of the wing tanks (At least as long as I wasn't standing on it at t= he time!). My biggest concern would be the size of the fuel puddle the plane= came to rest in. A hundred gallons spread out on the runway could make a re= al big fire real fast and would be difficult to survive if you were caught i= n the middle. Two cups of gas in the same scenario would be a much more surv= ivable situation.=20 > =20 > Another benefit of draining the tanks before impact is the reduction in gr= oss weight and therefore stall/impact speed. > =20 > Rob > In a message dated 12/30/10 20:10:11 Eastern Standard Time, colyncase@eart= hlink.net writes: > Rob, interesting info. > So sounds like if you do have a quick drain, you don't want to completely e= mpty it. > I have no idea how to build a quick drain that would not create some leaka= ge risk. > sounds like you are in this business? >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-1--178605873 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

Another way to reduce post crash fire is to eliminate or mitigate spark. So all electrical devices....OFF.

Sent from my iPad

On Dec 31, 2010, at 12:10 AM, REHBINC <rehbinc@aol.com> wrote:

Colyn,

I am a forensic engineer and work quite a bit with fire and explosion as well as mechanical/structural failure.

If I had a way to drain the fuel before crashing, I would get the tanks as dry as possible. A couple ounces of gasoline trapped somewhere in the tank would be plenty to make the space fuel rich. It isn't realistic to expect the entire tank to be fuel rich before impact, but a portion of it certainly will be. It is all a matter of time and temperature. In tank ships, you need around 2 gallons or so to make the space fuel rich. Frequently there is more than this trapped behind the tank scale.

For the reasons stated earlier, I wouldn't be too concerned about an explosion risk of the wing tanks (At least as long as I wasn't standing on it at the time!). My biggest concern would be the size of the fuel puddle the plane came to rest in. A hundred gallons spread out on the runway could make a real big fire real fast and would be difficult to survive if you were caught in the middle. Two cups of gas in the same scenario would be a much more survivable situation.

Another benefit of draining the tanks before impact is the reduction in gross weight and therefore stall/impact speed.

Rob

In a message dated 12/30/10 20:10:11 Eastern Standard Time, colyncase@earthlink.net writes:

Rob, interesting info.
So sounds like if you do have a quick drain, you don't want to completely empty it.

I have no idea how to build a quick drain that would not create some leakage risk.

sounds like you are in this business?

--Apple-Mail-1--178605873--